Tuesday, April 17, 2012

“How badly do some people wish for this evil to be turned into a new national backdrop?”

Last January we published an op-ed about the Breivik massacre by Ole Gjems-Onstad, a professor of tax law at the Norwegian School of Management, the University of Oslo, and the University of Stavanger. Below is a new opinion piece by the same author, from yesterday’s DN.no.

Many thanks to our Norwegian correspondent The Observer for the translation.

Trial without limitsby Ole Gjems-Onstad

We are so kind here in this country, so good, so full of love, such obvious favourites in the World Championship of boundless good intentions. Where all the other countries probably would be more resolute, we are afraid to even make the slightest mistake. By not setting limits, we reduce the risk of criticism. We give megalomaniac evil the utmost reward: The nation’s new mega-celebrity.

It is pointless to resist the forces that have been unleashed here. The mass murderer has become a money-making machine for tabloid newspapers, police (overtime) and an army of lawyers. Soon we’ll see the arrival of cash registers belonging to authors, publishers, theatre and film producers. Many share a common interest with the youth-butcher: Never forget his murders.

Norwegian ideologies have contributed to the killer’s receiving an unnecessarily expensive treatment. Early on the Prime Minister stated that Norway would meet violence with love. The message has been reiterated by others. We are going to be better than the murderer, show that we are not brutal.

The cry for love in the face of a vicious serial killer seems like confusing censorship. One is not allowed to retaliate. He shall have three prison cells and is not be subjected to any treatment that could reek of retribution. The greatest evil is to be shown respect. Then we are better than him. What kind of national inferiority complex is in any doubt about that? The Norwegian Church has not provided any help as to how adults should encounter cruel malice. The Church teaches children’s morals and turn the other cheek as opposed to setting limits, which July 22 and the trial are lacking.

The police, who failed fatally on July 22, are using unreal resources on protecting the mass murderer. He is escorted to court hearings as if he were the king of his dreams. Thousands of people on their way to work are delayed because the intersection that the murderer will be driven through is blocked off. On July 22 young people died because the police decided to protect themselves first. Now they can’t seem to use enough resources to protect the serial killer. The monster will not be thrown to the dogs. His self-inflicted risk is obviously entitled to more resources than that of potential rape victims.The prosecution and the press are literally running after the killer in order to fulfil his dreams of the status the killings should give him. He is given a week or more to explain himself. A district attorney has said that the accused according to the law has the right to explain himself freely. But a free explanation does not mean an unrestricted right to speak about matters that are criminally irrelevant. Nor are the judges supposed to write a third forensic psychiatric report about which key professionals staffs will disagree after an extensive observation.

The case is without any extenuating circumstances. No opinions justify the executions of innocent youths. For the strongest punishment in Norway two of the icy killings are sufficient.

The urgent witness list from the defence should have been reduced. The attempt to convert evil into politics is a diversion. Stein Lillevolden was commendably concise. If the court is giving in to a mass murderer’s media circus, I respectfully decline. I’m not going to testify. This is a response that other witnesses should also have the courage to give the Oslo District Court.

Many of the bereft want their children to be part of the criminal charge. That is easy to understand. But the price can be high for the families with the trial being taken beyond all boundaries. In a visual world, they will never get a safe haven in the future. Many have claimed that it is censorship not to broadcast the trial on normal TV. How badly do some people wish for this evil to be turned into a new national backdrop?

The army of legal aid is an uncontrolled hole in the taxpayers’ funds. The bad conscience of the leadership of the Labour Party may have contributed to the hundreds of lawyers submitting their invoices. In the future the rules need to be addressed.

Norwegian forensic psychiatry was probably a victim at Utøya. A welcome result may be to remove the unwise rule that a psychosis automatically exempts guilt.

Paradoxically, forced psychiatric treatment may be the most degrading punishment for the mass murderer: You are not a great knight, but a sick weakling. The endless interviews and media coverage could have been rejected. Patients must be protected against overexposure. Inmates in prisons have a completely different access to microphones in the nation of rights which is Norway.

Regardless, this evil murderer will never be allowed out. July 22 has shown us that ministers from the Labour Party almost never have to take responsibility. But even a minister from the Labour Party will not remain in his position for many hours if this mass murderer were ever to be let loose or granted leave.

26
comments:

Is fair and is completely OK to remember victims of his attack (i myself did some tribute) , but ABB is narcissistic and every time someone talks about him, his ego increases. He's going to become an historical hero, and this is bad. I didn't excepted that things would going so far.

I don't see Stoltenberg as 'better than the killer' in his action. STOLTenberg (and the word 'STOLTo' in italian has not a good meaning) is doing exactly what B wish. The right thing to me is what i once said: 'Forget ABB, let him become just another crazy human being that killed several people and nothing more!' .

This kind of fetishization of the rights and well being of a mass murderer by Norway demonstrates the opposite to respect for human life i.e. the lives of the innocent. It is surely the sign of a civilization in severe decline, a nation of masochists who have lost all proportion, all sense of right and wrong, all understanding that evil exists and must be confronted and extinguished, not overexposed and surrounded with a sick kind of celebrity that only a sick society would produce. Norway is hardly demonstrating how much better it is than Breivik but how it is equally pathological, since it continues to bring in toxic immigrants who will eventually have killed or injured as many innocents as Breivik did while altering the quality of life of the entire nation for the worse. And there is no end to the State's negligence/manslaughter/democide. The leftists in control of government are using the Breivik trial to solidify their multicult policies and make sure no one dares speak against them for fear of being lumped in with the raving lunatic whose disgusting actions have made him a tool of the Left to maintain Multicult in all its suicidal awfulness, not the Right.

They built a sick society, all creamy and sugar, where evil people could go and rape with impunity, sure the governments would turn a blind eye to their crimes.Now, confronted with the results of their actions, with the effect of their silly criminal code, they react with open disregard with any respect for the rules.

The statement "But even a minister from the Labour Party will not remain in his position for many hours if this mass murderer were ever to be let loose or granted leave." show how much the law is really respected in Norway when they harvest what they sow (I'm talking about the laws they enacted).

They didn't (and don't) respect the victims with weak laws, they don't respect the laws with their statements.

The trial is a circus, but you can't expect much from a nation that created a "sick society" as Mirco put it.

Looking at their society, it's the inverse of a healthy society. Here criminals are coddled in apartments called prisons and the victims given short shrift that would make a third world cop wince. And worse their multicult rulers are doing everything to destroy their nation by supporting suicidal immigration policies.

Oddly the Norwegians themselves seem to be quite happy with the status quo.

There are several points worth considering about Breivik's massacre of the innocents:

1. I believe it is now fairly obvious that the killer Breivik is not insane.

2. If it can be recognized that Breivik is not insane, then, as in all murder cases, a motive has to be found for his crime. A motive can be used in proving any crime as a 'proof' of the offence/s as having been carried out.

3. What motive/s will be seized upon by the court to assist in proving Breivik's guilt?

4. Why are person's who have no connection to Breivik, apart from having Breivik comment on their blog, being summoned as witnesses to Court? What possible and tangible evidence can these blog operators provide?

5. Why didn't the Court take up In Camera proceedings for the sake of the victims families rather than allow this trial to become a public circus?

I've worked in mental health for 30 years and from my experience I would classify Breveik as having severe Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He is grandiose, irrational and delusional. The tears for his own video, while no feeling or remorse for his victims, after nearly a year has passed, is a classic sign of psychopathy. His rationalisations are irrational. He has delusions about being a knight and that a group of people like him exist.

There is an ongoing debate as to whether personality disorders are "mad" or "bad". I work with these people all the time, and I agree it is tricky to view them as "mad", but I steer more towards veiwing them as victims of their own brain dysfunctions.

I think the comments being left on this blog give lie to the myth that this is a "far right" blog.

A far right blog would want multiculturalism to be destroyed at any cost, and would display moral uncertainty with regard to Breivik. This blog has no such uncertainty. Your readers do not seek mere destruction of what is evil, but a stable and strong society; and Breivik is a barbarian who has made Norwegian society more unstable, and as this article attests, weaker.

This is the blog of the true European moderate, who wants a moderate society without these destabilizing influences from both sides.

#laine - The leftists in control of government are using the Breivik trial to solidify their multicult policies and make sure no one dares speak against them for fear of being lumped in with the raving lunatic whose disgusting actions have made him a tool of the Left to maintain Multicult in all its suicidal awfulness, not the Right.

I though the same, after having seen yesterday how Jensen is loosing popularity while Dumberg is gaining it.

it is the way they present Norway to the world - inside here and in the life of single individuals the systems are harsh and tough and cold. Only look at the health system that denies a medical cancer treatment that works in denmark but here due to high costs is told to us its use is not good as a result to healing and it is not accepted due to that - it lacks results that we can say improve the health of out people therefore we will not invest in it - but have not tried it so how can they say it does not work? It works for Danish cancer patients but not for Norwegians? all because they want to save money. So are they so goody goody? Nope! only in front of the world. It is a play.

A couple of people in here refer to Norway as a "sick society". I wonder what kind of society you people consider "healthy" then?

Norway was in 2011 on top of The Human Development Index (HDI) rankings. HDI is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, and standards of living for countries worldwide.

When talking about immigration. Yes, there are some problems with uncivilized people doing nothing, or doing to much of the wrong stuff in Norway. But, the fact that work immigration has been a crucial factor to growth and development in Norway since the 70's, can not be neglected. Here is my point of view: Let's embrace the majority of immigrants contributing to development in our country. We still need a steady immigration, but not from backwards civilizations like Somalia, rural Pakistan, rural Afghanistan etc. It costs to much having to wait three generations before their offsping become civilized.

As for ABB. We know his crimes. He should not be given the opportunity to say anything. He should be executed. Legal proceedings are for cases where there are questions about guilt (as in most cases). In this case, however, there are no questions. ABB lost his privileges as a citizen the 22 of july 2011.

Yes it does seem from the controlled & therefore limited access to what the accused is actually saying, that the goal here, big-picture wise, is to let "multiculturalism" be the target, the key word that will be associated with the accused.

But they do not allow the audience access to the argument made by the accused. His facts and assertions are off limits.

(And even a broken clock is right twice a day.)

The aim is that whenever anyone else - and Fjordman will be in their sights soon enough - tries to make an argument criticising multiculturalism, they will be portrayed not as citizens who have legitimate worries about their own society.

They will be portrayed as trying to justify the actions of the accused.

As in: "Look! He does support him after all!"

The smear job is on. Early stages yet, but watch out when Fjordman takes the stand. They'll be gunning for him, just as cold-bloodedly and ruthlessly as the accused went after his victims.

"We still need a steady immigration, but not from backwards civilizations like Somalia, rural Pakistan, rural Afghanistan etc. It costs to much having to wait three generations before their offsping become civilized".

In fact there is no evidence that any amount of time or money civilizes illiterate barbarians who come to a lib multicult society that reinforces their right to remain backward. Indeed there's contrary evidence, as second generation Pakistanis born in Britain are more devout and hostile than are their parents who originally emigrated from Pakistan. In addition, Muslims emigrating to the West exert pressure on their female co-religionists to veil their faces or at least hide their hair under a hijab rather than casting off this primitive apparel and part of a colonizer's uniform.